From 3225812997727ae6a3efc81a13a86258ad693bcf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Raymond Hill Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 22:47:30 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] =?UTF-8?q?Updated=20=C2=B5Block=20and=20others:=20Blockin?= =?UTF-8?q?g=20ads,=20trackers,=20malwares=20(markdown)?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --- µBlock-and-others:-Blocking-ads,-trackers,-malwares.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/µBlock-and-others:-Blocking-ads,-trackers,-malwares.md b/µBlock-and-others:-Blocking-ads,-trackers,-malwares.md index f6edc7e..52e67d8 100644 --- a/µBlock-and-others:-Blocking-ads,-trackers,-malwares.md +++ b/µBlock-and-others:-Blocking-ads,-trackers,-malwares.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ This benchmark is to measure privacy exposure, by counting the number of **disti have been hit by net requests during the benchmark. The lower the number of distinct 3rd-party domains hit, the better. Some benchmarks measure the amount of requests blocked, which I think is of no interest as a useful -measurement of privacy exposure. The number of requests blocked is no guarantee of less distinct 3rd-party domains being hit (and leaving a trace in the servers' log). +measurement of privacy exposure. The number of requests blocked is no guarantee of less distinct 3rd-party domains being hit (and leaving a trace in the servers' logs). Measuring directly the number of distinct 3rd-party domains which were hit is a much better and relevant measurement for comparison of privacy protection efficiency in my opinion.